acedatacloud_get_wallet_summary

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose any behavioral aspects such as permissions, data freshness guarantees, or side effects. It simply lists what is retrieved without addressing potential implications.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, concise and to the point. It lists the key components without unnecessary verbosity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description is too vague to provide a complete understanding of what the wallet summary includes. Terms like 'balance freshness' and 'visible ACE services' are undefined, and without context about the platform's domain, an agent would struggle to know what this tool actually returns.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description correctly reflects the absence of inputs.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description indicates it retrieves wallet-related information such as binding, balance freshness, discounts, and visible ACE services, but the terms are ambiguous and the exact nature of the summary is unclear. It partially aligns with the tool name 'get_wallet_summary' but lacks specificity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., get_balance, usage_summary). It does not mention any conditions or contexts that would make this tool the preferred choice.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.